« October 2004 | Main | December 2004 »
November 29, 2004
Judgement
The continuing fallout from the ending of the Blunkett-Fortier affair continues to provide a considerable volume of unedifying press comment. What bothers me most about the whole sorry affair is what it reveals about our Home Secretary's powers of judgement, and the insights it gives into his character that appear to reveal both bullying and naive traits.Many are wondering (and worrying) that this may signal the end of Blunkett's career, but it seems that most of the public, the media and the Government have a huge blindspot when it comes to David Blunkett.
My prediction: Blunkett will remain Home Secretary until after the next general election, when he can - if necessary - be sacrificed by Blair in the event of an electoral mauling, on the pretense that Blunkett didn't handle the crime<-->terror issues well enough.
--------
Posted by Clive at 11:46 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Backing Blair
Over at Bloggerheads, Manic is backing Blair. Read his post very carefully, think about it a lot, and don't jump to conclusions.Here at the UK Today, I'm still working on a couple of ways of removing Blair, neither of which involve guns or explosive devices (thos I merely dream about occasionally).
ImpeachBlair are still actively pursuing the impeachment route, in spite of hiccups with their hosting. Their chances of success must be considered slim, especially given the lack of high level support from the opposition parties. Indeed one can only assume that both Howard and Kennedy condone Blair's conduct.
--------
Posted by Clive at 11:36 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 25, 2004
He's back
Tom Watson's blog is now back after a change of hosting. More bandwidth and better support response should mean that recent problems with the blog appearing/disappearing become a thing of the past. --------Posted by Clive at 7:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 23, 2004
Double standard
Let's look at the treatment of two notable politicians.On the right we have Boris Johnson, Tory MP for Henley-upon-Thames, recently sacked by Michael Howard over his handling of press intrusion into his private life, specifically relating to an affair he is alledged to have had.
On the left we have David Blunkett, Labour Home Secretary. Not only has his affair with a married woman not been an issue, but it would appear that Tony Blair isn't bothered by reports that Blunkett is pushing for paternity tests for Kimberley Fortier's children.
Now, let's ignore the moral aspects of the two cases, but instead take a look at the reltive positions of the two MPs, and their subsequent conduct.
Boris was Shadow Arts Minister.
Blunkett is Home Secretary.
Boris described the situation as piffle, and only spoke once with his leader before being sacked. Subsequently trying to put the matter behind him and generally behaving in a contrite manner.
Blunkett used ministerial resources when trying to sort out his relationship with Kimberly Fortier, pestered her, and wouldn't let go when she decided to stay with her husband. Furthermore, rather than letting Kimberly Fortier and her husband, Stephen Quinn, get on with rebuilding their marriage, he is now insisting on paternity tests in an effort to obtain access to the children and remain involved in Ms Fortier's life. And note that neither Ms Fortier nor her husband want any involvement from Blunkett. In short, Blunkett is behaving like a cross between a love-struck teenager and a stalker. Yet he retains the support of the Prime Minister.
To be honest, I'm not sure who comes out the worst in all this. Certainly not Boris. Howard looks like either a prat prone to knee-jerk responses or a spiteful man fearful of a possible future leadership challenger. Blunkett looks like a dodgy stalker, an emotionally immature man who can't let go. And Blair looks like a man who doesn't give a f*%k as long as he is still in power and surrounded by yes-men.
--------
Posted by Clive at 1:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Oops
Computer Weekly - Worm hidden in UK site's banner adsAnyone who clicked on a banner ad on UK technology news website the Register on Saturday morning could have infected their computer with a variant of the Bofra worm.
The Register said that its third-party ad serving company Falk had become infected with the Bofra/IFrame exploit, forcing the site to suspend ads from Falk.
--------
Posted by Clive at 1:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Nothing to fear...
... but fear itself.The Queen's Speech is today, and the Government has put the fight against crime at the heart of it. Now that's laudable; talk to most people in the street and they'd say that one of their biggest concerns is crime. So the fact that up to nine Home Office bills are due to be announced should be a matter for celebration?
Well, not really.
For starters, for a government that claimed to be tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime most of the measures are reactive, rather than preventive. Compulsory drug testing for people arrested for some crimes, but what will that do to prevent crime? And if drugs are such a hot potato, what is the Government doing about the chaos and confusion of it's decriminalisation of cannabis?
And then we have the Serious Organised Crime Agency, Britain's answer to the FBI. Well, that one was announced back in February and the criticisms raised then are still valid.
But the devious and dishonest aspect to the Home Office bills is the way the Government is using them to link crime and terror. By blurring the distinction and thus linking the two in the public's conciousness they use the fear of one (crime) to boost the credibility of the other (terror).
Ask youself, are the introduction of measures such as Biometric ID Cards, trial without jury, introducing material gather by the intelligence services as admissable evidence, are any of these going to stop the local oiks from smashing your car window and nicking the radio; are they going to reduce the number of muggings?
Are they going to make any substantial difference in preventing terror attacks? In other words, are they necessary?
Today the newspapers headlines tell us that an Al Qaeda attack on Canary Wharf was foiled.
Well, that got your attention didn't it. Once again visions of airliners flying into tall buildings, death and destruction raining down from the sky. Better throw our weight behind Blair, Blunkett and their sweeping removal of our civil liberties. After all, better safe than sorry.
Dig a bit deeper though, and the reality of the situation emerges. For starters, look at the language used; thwarted and believe they have stopped. Hardly a definitive statement.
Instead look at the story in another newspaper:
The Guardian - Security services play down 'terror plot'
Claims that the security services foiled a plot by terrorists to fly an aircraft into Canary Wharf, London's tallest building, were played down last night by senior Whitehall officials.
Anti-terrorist sources said they were unaware of any plot to attack the tower, though for some time they have had it on their list as an obvious "iconic target".
"The assertion is surprising", said one well-placed official, referring to claims on ITV and in the Daily Mail newspaper.
Plans of Heathrow, and targets in the United States, indicated a serious intention on the part of al-Qaida sympathisers, but were placed on the computers by suspected terrorists some years ago, official sources say.
How convenient that the original story broke the day before the Queen's Speech announces the Government's intentions to introduce sweeping new powers for the security services. And with probably not much more than six months until the General Election, you can expect to see a lot more of these sorts of stories.
The biggest threat is buried in the Guardian report, in what it reveals about the thought processes of our Home Secretary:
The security and intelligence services have foiled plots and gathered evidence of plans to attack British targets, as David Blunkett, the home secretary, has repeatedly suggested in recent speeches.
They will be revealed, he has suggested, in forthcoming trials.
What ever happened to the presumption of innocence? It would appear that Blunkett either believes, or wants us to believe that the mere act of holding a trial confirms the terror threat. And of course, with the introduction of trial without jury for terror cases and the implementation of crimes relating to the intention to carry out terrorist acts (and doesn't that sound vague) it becomes even simpler to justify the terror threat.
The biggest threat to freedom in this country today is not Al Qaeda, not the forces of terror, but rather our own leadership. They're the ones who want to destroy our civil liberties, they're the ones who dragged us into Bush's War on Terror.
Remember that whenever you see a terror threat foiled story over the next few months.
--------
Posted by Clive at 11:34 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 17, 2004
War
So according to an MoD inquiry, the deaths of the six military policemen in Southern Iraq last year were not preventable.The MoD concluded overall that a number of events may have had a bearing on the men's deaths, but that it was impossible to say more ammunition or improved communications might have saved them.
Of course there was one way of preventing their deaths. And that is by not being there in the first place.
--------
Posted by Clive at 3:36 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Hunting
Well the House of Commons unsurprising rejected ammendments made by the Lords to the bill to ban fox hunting. I'm not going to get into the rights and wrongs of fox hunting, but would like to point out the odd stance of Michael Howard.When discussing the matter on the Today programme, Howards stated, in reference to a proposal to delay the ban until July 2006:
That delay would allow people to change the sort of activities they are involved in and avoid the sort of animal welfare issues that could come up.
It is a common sense approach, I hope the House of Lords will accept it.
Which is all very nice, but not necessarily good political strategy. Some members of the Lords advocate rejecting any delay, which would result in the Parliament Act being used and the ban coming in to force by the end of February. From a Conservative perspective this would seem like an excellent tactic, as the resulting protests by the countryside groups would cause embarrasment to the Government during the run up to the general election, and also make any visit by George W. Bush far more entertaining.
Instead, Howard's almost wishy-washy approach seems symptomatic of the reasons why the Conservatives are failing to make significant headway against Labour. They complain about not being able to put clear water between their policies and Labour's and then ignore the opportunity when it arises.
--------
Posted by Clive at 1:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
War
On the heels of the news that a British soldier was unlawfully killed during nerve gas tests at Porton Down, comes the announcement from the http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4018603.stm is real, and that the MoD should compensate veterans thus affected.All in all, a welcome conclusion, especially considering the obstructions raised by the MoD who refused to allow serving officials or military personnel to appear before the inquiry although it did submit written evidence.
--------
Posted by Clive at 1:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Hypocrisy
Anyone who remembers Red Wedge from the 80's will also remember Billy Bragg's links with that Labour-supporting movement. Well Bill's back, with a new version of the classic Hymn I Vow To Thee My Country.This little gem is entitled The Many Not The Few, and is a paen to socialist ideals. The sentiments it expresses are truly worthy, yet in so many ways at odds with the actions of the Labour leadership. If the Labour Party does adopt it as another party anthem, then it will stand as yet another tribute to the hypocrisy of the Blairites.
--------
Posted by Clive at 1:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Nothing to fear...
... but fear itself.The key issue for the next election will be fear.
Your fear
It won't be presented as such, with the emphasis being placed on security, but fear will be the key.
If you don't believe this, check out these links:
Blunkett explains your terror nightmares - be very afraid
Spyblog - BBC Radio 4 Today programme interview with Home Secretary
For those who abhor Real Player, an MP3 version of the interview can be downloaded here. Be warned, it's an 11Mb MP3 file, but worth listening to just to hear Blunkett's almost incomprehensible attempt to couch draconian restrictions on civil liberties in reasonable terms.
And look at just a couple of items of legislation coming up:
Civil Contingencies Bill - A masterful piece of legislation that allows for a Secretary of State to declare a state of emergency without consultation with, or reference to, the Privy Council or the Head of State. Once the Civil Contingencies card has been played, then the Terrorism Act 2000 comes into play, and there are a number of people held indefinitely in prison without charge who could tell what an affront to civil liberties that Act is.
Identity Cards - And much as Blunkett would like you to think of them as a sort of super Driving Licence style card, but for everybody, they aren't. ID cards pose an even greater threat to your freedoms than you could possibly believe. But you'll want one, because it will save you from identity theft. There again, so would simply shredding documents with identify information in them, exercising caution when shopping on line and being wary of cold callers. All of which carry a far lower cost than the introduction of ID cards.
The key phrase for the Government is pre-emption.
They're sensible, pre-emptive measures. Pre-emptive in the sense that we live now in a rapidly changing world, where people's fears are greater, not just in terms of terrorism, but fear in their own neighbourhood and community, and we've been able to establish stability and security in terms of the economy, and people's economic family life, we need to be able to do that in their immediate environment, and internationally, and in dealing with terrorism.
Which is an impressive pile of steaming bullshit from our Home Secretary. If we feel less secure in our neighbourhoods, it's because of direct experiences, because of failure by Government to act in our interests.
And notice the attempt to link the handling of our security to Labour's handling of the economy? Unfortunately, Blunkett does not poses an equivalent of Brown's prudence.
Now Blunkett justifies measures already introduced, claiming that by their use the security services have pre-empted and prevented terror attacks in Britain, thus making us safer.
So why introduce further measures?
Blunkett would respond that the risk is still out there and greater than ever. Which is debatable. And any increase in risk is due almost entirely to the actions of Tony Blair in entangling us in Iraq.
The truly frightening aspect of all this is what the interview reveals about the thought processes of the Home Secretary and, by implication, the Government. Listen to the interview, read the transcript and then consider whether or not you really want these people controlling your life. That's right, not making you safer or more secure, but instead controlling you life through the draconian destruction of your personal freedoms and civil liberties.
(Thanks to The Honourable Fiend for link to transcript)
--------Posted by Clive at 10:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 16, 2004
Light Relief
Norfolk has come in for some stick over the years, ranging from the boring scenery (having lived in the Fenlands near Wisbech, I can testify that a more barren and drab winter wasteland has yet to be found in the British Isles) to the allegations of incest and inbreeding (for American visitors, think the deep south, rednecks and girls marrying their uncle).Well, this wonderful county now has another claim to fame. For located in the quaint town of Great Yarmouth is Louis Tussaud's House of Wax, home to some of the most hideous and un-realistic wax models ever created.
If you want to know just how bad it is, guess which famous footballing celebrity this is supposed to be...
Posted by Clive at 3:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 15, 2004
Terror
Remember, terrorists are on our doorstep, hiding amongst us. They could be anyone, even the person who fixes your washing machine.
The Scotsman - Meanwhile, in Iraq yesterday, it emerged that two suspected suicide bombers captured and interrogated by the Black Watch have been released. Royal Military Police detectives told officers there was not enough evidence to charge them and said they might just have been innocent bystanders.
Circuit boards found inside their car were from washing machines and the men claimed to be plumbers.
--------
Posted by Clive at 5:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Role Reversal
Politicians have a tendency to rely on weasel words, whilst the military is known for plain talking (well, except for the US Armed Forces who seem to have a whole division dedicated to dressing up unpleasant truths in fancy words - Collateral Damage anyone?).Which makes the little spat between Tony Blair and Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Mike Jackson all the more entertaining for the role reversal it depicts.
On the one hand we have Tony Blair who, through masterful and visionary decision making, managed to dig himself a hole by sending the Black Watch to do his political dirty work for Bush at the same time as the regiment's merger with other Scottish regiments was announced. Seeing what a screw up he'd made of the whole matter, Blair apparently went cap-in-hand and asked General Jackson to get him out of a hole.
Which, for Blair, is pretty straight talk.
General Jackson's reply was straight from one of the Army's manuals, Selection and retention of aim is a fundamental principle of war. Or in other words, tough shit, you made the decision now stick with it.
Still, in spite of his general air of uselessness and incompetance, at least Geoff Hoon managed to maintain the tradition of political evasion (if not the tradition of the Black Watch), Certainly, it is within a very reasonable probability that that formula you have described, where the name of a historic regiment is part of its ultimate title, is something that clearly is a proper solution to this issue. Which translated means We'll try and keep the name in use regardless and hope that the public don't catch on and realise that the regiment has been thoroughly buggered by us. All being well it won't cost us too much support north of the Border and I can keep my job.
Now this whole matter poses a dilemma. Personally I can see both sides of the debate regarding the regiments and their consolidation, but would like to see units such as the Black Watch retain their identity. But at the same time I'd like to see Blair comprehensively embarrased by the whole matter. Tough call.
--------
Posted by Clive at 5:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Bush Revisit(ed)
Remember this? When George W Bush last visited this sceptred isle in November last year he spent most of his time in armoured limos, avoiding contact with any but the most deranged members of the public.
Well it's rumoured that the Shrub is returning sometime in February, presumably as a gesture of thanks to Blair for saving him from the political embarassment of sending more US troops to Iraq just before the Presidential Elections.
If nothing else, this should scotch any rumours of a snap February general election. For those of us opposed to the War in Iraq, on Terror and against our civil liberties, it presents an opportunity to bring Blair's record into the public eye. With the best guess currently being an election held in May, a visit by Bush in February could present Blair with a multitude of problems by bringing the worst aspects of the war on terror to the forefront only a couple of months before polling day.
As various activities are planned and announced, please, please, please get involved.
(link courtesy of poons)
--------
Posted by Clive at 4:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Boris
In what can best be descibed as an act of idiocy, Michael Howard has sacked Boris Johnson for being, in the words of Michael Ancram less than frank about newpaper allegations regarding Johnson's private life.And this at a time when, to be brutally honest, the Conservatives needs all the popular appeal and charisma they can lay their hands on. I wonder how much this sacking is due to the Conservatives historical problems in the trouser department? Certainly on the other side of the house, having an affair with a married woman didn't seem to pose any problems for David Blunkett.
More over at Boris' blog later this week (hopefully), and additional comment at Boriswatch.
--------
Posted by Clive at 9:47 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Justice
With a General Election most likely to be held in May 2005, Tony Blair has already got the ball rolling. And it looks like he is going to take a similar approach to George W Bush, by using terrorism and the fear of attack as a way of garnering support for Labour.This stance was signalled by David Blunkett's statement yesterday that Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda are on our doorstep and threatening our lives. Well I guess that explains why the US has been unable to find Osama, they've obviously been looking in the wrong place. Perhaps they should try Accrington rather than Afghanistan.
It seems likely that next week's Queen's Speech will focus on law and order, so brace yourselves for further restrictions on civil liberties and a continuing erosion of justice.
Yesterday's appearance by Blunkett on BBC's Breakfast with Frost was a rich source of Blunkett bullshit. Al-Qaeda and the international network is seen to be, and will be demonstrated through the courts over months to come, to be actually on our doorstep and threatening our lives. said our visionary Home Secretary when referring to a number of terrorist cases expected to go before the courts next year. Then came the classic punchline, They may be found not guilty. But our security and policing services have been securing our wellbeing over the last few years
So let's get this straight. The arrest of these suspects demonstrates the degree of risk of terrorist attack to which we are exposed, and shows what an excellent job the security forces are doing. And that remains the case even if the accused are proven innocent? Oh, and notice the subtle wording Blunkett used, They may be found not guilty, rather than proven innocent. Basically saying that he believes they're guilty as sin, regardless of any legal niceties such as a fair trial.
Still, as Blunkett said yesterday, New Labour is closer to being the main party of law and order and security than we have been in our history. Bit of a shame then that last week's Home Office white paper revealed that England and Wales has the second highest crim rate in Europe.
Expect more Blunkett Bullshit over the coming months; as it looks like we're in for a pretty negative election campaign, long on spin and short on content.
Update - 11:00 - More on this at bloggerheads
--------
Posted by Clive at 9:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 11, 2004
Remember
86 years ago today, the guns fell silent on the Western Front, and the War To End All Wars came to a close. 4 years of slaughter, lives shattered, communities gutted. Never again, people vowed, would nations indulge in such excesses of violence.But they did. The list of subsequent conflicts makes for depressing reading, though the following is not exhaustive, it does cover most conflicts since 11th November 1918 that involved more than one nation:
Allied Intervention in Russian Civil War (1919 - 1921)
Second World War (1939 - 1945)
Ecuador - Peru Border War (1941)
Madagascar Rebellion (1947)
First Kashmir War (1947 - 1948)
Israeli War of Independence (1948 - 1949)
Korean War (1950 - 1953)
Mau-Mau War (1952 - 1956)
Algerian War of Independence (1954 - 1962)
Suez Campaign (1956)
Lebanese Civil War (1958)
French - Tunisian Clashes (1958)
Dhofar Rebellion in Oman (1960s - 1970s)
Congo Crisis (1960 - 1967)
Cameroon Rebellion (1960 - 1963)
Liberation of Goa (1961)
French - Tunisian Clashes (1961)
Angolan War of Independence (1961 - 1975)
Sino-Indian War (1962)
Eritrean War of Independence (1962 - 1991)
Tutsi Invasion of Rwanda (1963)
Algerian - Moroccan Border War (1963 - 1964)
Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde Islands War of Independence (1963 - 1974)
Vietnam War (1956 - 1975)
Laotian Civil War (1960 - 1975)
Mozambican War of Independence (1964 - 1975)
Somali Border Wars with Ethiopia and Kenya (1964 - 1967)
Tutsi Invasion of Rwanda (1964)
Second Kashmir War (1965)
Dominican Intervention (1965 - 1966)
North Yemen Civil War (1966 - 1968)
Namibian War of Independence (1966 - 1990)
Sino-Indian Skirmish (1967)
Nigerian Civil War (1967 - 1970)
Six Day War (1967)
Jordanian Civil War (1970)
Mercenary Invasion of Guinea (1970)
Cambodian Civil War (1970 - 1975)
Bengali War of Independence (1971)
Yom Kippur War (1973)
Lebanese Civil War (1975 - 1990)
Angolan Civil War (1975 - 2002)
Mozambican Civil War (1975 - 1992)
Saharan War (1975 - Present)
Egypt - Libya War (1977)
Ogaden War (1977 - 1978)
Uganda - Tanzania War (1979)
First Persion Gulf War (1980 - 1988)
Casamance Rebellion in Senegal (1980 - Present)
Ecuador - Peru Border War (1981)
Falklands War (1982)
Israeli Invasion of Lebanon (1982 - 1984)
Grenada Invasion (1983)
Israeli-Lebanese Border War (1984 - 2000)
First Intifada (1987 - 1993)
Panama Invasion (1989)
Sierra Leone Civil War (1990s)
Kashmir Border Conflict (1990 - Present)
Somali Civil War (1990 - Present)
Second Persian Gulf War (1990 - 1991)
Third Balkan War (1991 - Present)
Yemeni Civil War (1994)
Occupation of Haiti (1994 - Present)
Chiapas Uprising (1994 - Present)
Ecuador - Peru Border War (1995)
Yemen - Eritrea Border Conflict (1996)
Zairian - Congolese Civil War (1996 - 1997)
Congo Civil War (1997)
Saudi - Yemen Border Conflict (1998)
Kosovo Conflict (1998)
Congo Civil War (1998 - 2002)
Guinea-Bissau Civil War (1998-1999)
Liberian Civil War (1999)
Second Intifada (2000 - Present)
The War in Afghanistan (2001 - Present)
Third Persian Gulf War (2003 - Present)
Every year, at the Cenotaph in Whitehall, and at remembrance services throught the world, the follow words are spoken:
They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old;
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.
And indeed many of us do remember. But how many have learned the lesson written in the blood of slaughtered youth? That war is no solution, but instead creates more problems than it addresses. And where are the memorials to the innocent civilians, the aged, the infirm, the children? People who's deaths are, in too many cases, simply not recorded, subject to estimated casualty figures, described as collateral damage. Yet these are human beings like you and me, people who think and feel, who hurt and can be hurt. And we don't even accord them the smallest dignity of recording their passing.
Also spare a thought for the families and friends of the latest British casualties in Iraq, men who died not in some noble cause, but were sacrificed on the alter of political vanity and moral bankruptcy.
Private Pita Tukutukuwaqa
Private Paul Lowe
Private Scott McArdle
Private Kevin McHale
Sergeant Stuart Gray
Yet those who allow our leaders to conduct such morally unacceptable acts are complicit. If you truly believe that wars such as this are wrong, then speak out lest your silence be taken as aquiescence.
We must do more than remember. We must learn.
--------
Posted by Clive at 11:00 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 9, 2004
Hmmm
Read what can only be described as a Tory Wankfest over at the Telegraph. I must find out what they're smoking though, seems like pretty powerful stuff. Can't imagine Judi Dench having such a total failure in taste that she ends up married to Prince Charles (or King William V as the fantasists at the Telegraph would have it). Do love the idea of dodgy photos of Mandellson, his Brazilian boyfriend and Tony Blair having a working weekend together. Certainly makes the mind boggle, though they seem to have missed the irony in having Portillo as Prime Minister while the rest of the world becomes a nuclear wasteground. --------Posted by Clive at 8:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 5, 2004
Democracy
The people of the North East of England have spoken, and the word they said was No. John Prescott's dream of regional assemblies for England - effectively toothless talking shops whos sole purpose is to placate the English who resent the Scottish and Welsh Assemblies - should be dead after yesterday's referendum voted No by an overwhelming 78%, albeit on a turnout of 47.8%.Prescott actually seemed to take it quite well, stating that The North East public have answered in an emphatic way. I am a democrat and I accept that. I was surprised by the clear majority and I think there was a number of reasons for that - and claims of more politicians and greater council tax has an effect. It was an overwhelming defeat for the proposal put before the North East public. As a government we believe in letting the people have their say.
Well, okay, we know that the last bit about people having their say is bullshit, but on the whole gracious in defeat.
One would hope that this would be an end to the matter, but not according to Nick Raynsford. I don't want to make an instant decision on anything. There are important lessons to be learned from yesterday's referendum and we need to consider them in the cool light of day. Which basically means that by hook or by crook this government will do its damdest to get regional assemblies introduced.
And they have a good reason to want the assemblies approved, as the West Lothian issue not only remains unaddressed, but likely to grow in importance, especially as the legislature in Scotland make more and more decisions that differ from policy in England. A classic example of this is the border town of Berwick upon Tweed, where serious consideration is being given to the idea of the town becoming part of Scotland again.
There are two more realistic alternatives to regional assemblies. The first is to prevent Scottish MPs from voting on issues that don't affect Scotland, but Blair needs his tartan army and so that is unlikely to happen. The other is to introduce more accountability for our elected representatives. And this is where change can be effected, as this article at bloggerheads, and the recent growth in political blogging both by and on behalf of MPs, shows.
--------
Posted by Clive at 9:18 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 4, 2004
Iraq
We all remember the scorn poured upon Tony Blair when he claimed that the Black Watch would be home by Christmas. His words have proved all too true, at least for three families. The tragedy is that their loved ones will be coming home in body bags.Along with the 3 dead soldiers it is reported that an Iraqi translator has also been killed. Doubt we'll hear any sincere words of regret from George Bush.
Blair found time for some words of sympathy as his spokesman stated The Prime Minister's thoughts are with the Black Watch and the families of the Black Watch.
Still, from Blair's perspective they've done their job, in saving George Bush from the embarassment of having to send additional American forces out to Iraq just before the election.
Expect more bad news of this kind as the American's prosecute their attack on Fallujah and as Iraq begins its run-up to January's elections.
--------Posted by Clive at 6:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 3, 2004
U.S. Election
Well the show isn't over 'til the fat lady sings, and that won't be for at least 11 days when the counting of Ohio's votes will be complete. But we have to face up to the prospect of another 4 years of George W. Bush in the Whitehouse, 4 more years that will be divisive not only for the United States, but also for the global community.Assuming the worst, what needs to be done now is to remove as many of Bush's allies as possible. Over at bloggerheads manic is already targetting Murdoch's media empire in an effort to get the real stories out into the public domain, and I urge you all to support his efforts.
But there is another Bush associate who could become vulnerable. Tony Blair. Sometime in the next seven months the U.K. will be voting in a general election. If we can remove Blair, then we will have robbed Bush of his most valuable European ally. And without the active support of Blair, Bush will become more isolated from the international community. The days when the U.S. could afford to act in isolation against the wishes of the global community will fast come to an end as Bush elevates America to the status of international pariah. With Blair gone, any attempts by Bush to act alone will result in America paying the full cost of its President's actions, with no shared responsibility, no bosom buddies at Camp David.
If you want to help get rid of Blair, get in contact via sedgefield05@theuktoday.co.uk
Four. Years. Is. Too. Long. To. Wait.
--------
Posted by Clive at 10:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 1, 2004
That effing woman
Once again Cherie Blair is unable to keep her gob shut. And while I applaud her sentiments with regards to George W. Bush, I'm pretty fed up hwith the woman trying to have her cake and eat it.But Downing Street said she was speaking in her capacity as a lawyer.
Cherie Booth has always regarded herself as having an independent career. She has continued to practise as a major human rights lawyer in the courts.
What she seems to forget is that people only listen to her, and are willing (though God only knows why) pay money for the privilege simply because she's the Prime Minister's wife. Without that she'd still be known as "The lawyer daughter of womanising actor Tony Booth", hardly the most endearing or lucrative of epithets.
--------
Posted by Clive at 1:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Election
While the US gets to vote tomorrow on whether or not to re-elect an over-zealous incompetant, we shouldn't forget that sometime in the next six or seven months we will be faced with a General Election. At the weekend there were a flurry of reports suggesting that Labour was doing so well that there might be a snap election in February.In an interview in today's Guardian Alan Milburn scotched those rumours, but did concede that planning for a May election was already in place. More interesting were his slightly odd comments regarding the nature of next year's election.
What we cannot allow is for this next election to turn into some form of referendum purely on the government's performance.
Now excuse me for being a bit dense here, but surely this government's performance is exactly what the election should be about. Unless Milburn is being deliberately obtuse, and what he really wanted to say was that What we cannot allow is for this next election to turn into some form of referendum purely on the Prime Minister's performance.
Which would be understandable given all the talk of Milburn as Blair's natural, New Labour successor as leader.
But Milburn needs to be very careful. As election coordinator he will be held responsible for any poor performance next year. And in the current climate, while a Labour victory still seems all but certain, with Liability Blair as leader the party can expect to see its majorty pruned back. With that in mind, Milburn ought to consider improving his review techniques as his grasp of what actually happened in the recent Hartlepool by-election shows a rather tenuous grasp of reality...
Once they [Lib-Dems] are subject to scrutiny and test, and, once we take the battle to them, as the Hartlepool byelection proved, at that point they start to crumble.
Obviously a different Hartlepool by-election to the one I was following. And while Milburn is trying to ensure a substantial majority come May, he will need to keep more than just a weather eye on Gordon Brown. After all, anything less than a stellar performance would most likely see Blair exposed and Milburn hung out to dry. Which would be the most suitable result for Gordon.
--------
Posted by Clive at 1:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Tony Blair
Who remembers the look on Michael Portillo's face when he lost his seat in 1997?Would you like to see Tony Blair in the same situation?
With Labour's planning for the next general election already well in-hand, and with the US Presidential election nearly having run its course, now seems like a good time to get things moving. I've already got a couple of things in the pipeline, but if you've any ideas or thoughts on how we can help Tony Blair lose his Sedgefield seat, then please send them to sedgefield05@theuktoday.co.uk. Any constructive ideas will be welcome, but please leave out any suggestions as to the most effective ways of assasinating Tony Blair. I'd rather not have a home visit from the security services.
--------
Posted by Clive at 1:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack